These are_ to say the least_

retail FORUM
The Newsletter of the National Retail Planning Forum
Number 17
JULY 2009
Challenging times
NRPF Chairman Chris Brearley on the challenging economic and policy
context. Inside, a range of contributors offer assessments of the new
draft PPS4
T
hese are, to say the least, visit. At our conferences and workshops officials from the DCLG, will be a really
challenging times: for the you will hear from excellent speakers useful opportunity to discuss PPS4
economy, for the financial system, and have the opportunity to discuss during its consultation period. But we are
for the retail and property industries, and issues and meet colleagues. keen to do better – never more so than
also for politics, for Parliament and for Our next conference, in Birmingham now – and we greatly welcome your
government. Not since the 1970s at least on 17 July, which will be attended by suggestions and input. I
has there been such uncertainty.
Whether by coincidence or not, this NRPF & LGA present...
same time is a challenging one for town
and country planning as well. There has
been great change in the system for Retailing out of recession –
producing development plans, with the
move (by no means yet completed) to
Regional Spatial Strategies and Local
the challenges ahead
Development Frameworks. There has 10 am - 4 pm, 17 July 2009
been significant change too in the
presentation and content of planning
The Council House, Birmingham
policy, with the move to a smaller group l Just what sort of shape is the retail sector now in? l Who are the likely
of broader Planning Policy Statements. winners and losers? l How should city managers and investors respond?
So far as retail is concerned, we not only l What new opportunities are emerging?
have the revisions to policy following the
With speakers from the private sector and central and local government,
earlier reviews and consultations,
this event aims to clarify the thinking behind the new consolidated
including the abolition of the need test
government policy advice in PPS4 and, crucially, to set out the economic
and its replacement with the new impact
and commercial context against which the new policy will be tested.
assessment, but also the grouping of
retail policies with other economic Andrew Smith from Aberdeen Investors UK will consider the winners and
planning policies in the new PPS 4 losers in the present recession, and will present some of the likely
(Planning for Prosperous Economies), scenarios that city and town managers will face in future. A second
currently out in draft for consultation. session will deal specifically with the new PPS4, with speakers from
There is a lot for practitioners to take DCLG, before going on to look more specifically at different aspects of the
on board here, and much to discuss. It new policy and its associated guidance. A panel comprising retailers,
highlights the importance of what we do. investors, local government, city managers and BiTC will close the day,
NRPF is a non-partisan partnership looking forward to the challenges that lie ahead.
between retail, developer, financial and
Visit www.nrpf.org/ for more details, or to book your place now, contact:
governmental interests with a remit to
George Nicholson, Secretary, NRPF, 6 Copperfield Street, London SE1 0EP
inform the issues and encourage debate.
E-mail: Gnicho6499@aol.com
This regular newsletter keeps you in
touch, and our website (at There is a small charge of £50 to cover the cost of the event. Cheques
www.nrpf.org/), with its well regarded should be made out to The National Retail Planning Forum.
resource base, is always there for you to
Visit the NRPF website – http://www.nrpf.org/
Promoting private-public sector understanding of planning’s impact on retailing
PPS4 Debate
In the following pages, nine contributors give their views on the new draft
PPS4. Unless explicitly stated, these are personal views and do not
necessarily represent those of their organisations...
Concise and direct, but integration lacking
Cliff Guy, Cardiff University
T he new draft PPS4: Planning for
Prosperous Economies,1 out for
consultation until 28 July 2009, stems
centres’, which reinstates advice on
supporting second-tier centres (which
had been watered down in the
and/or ‘clear evidence’ of ‘significant
adverse impacts’ as grounds for
refusal, but also instructs local
from a Government commitment to consultation revision of PPS6); authorities to ‘consider proposals
integrate economic and town centre G EC 5.1.5, which acknowledges that favourably’ if their ‘wider economic,
planning, following the report by development plans should consider social and environmental benefits’
Matthew Taylor MP into rural issues. It what to do about ‘centres in decline’; outweigh the adverse impacts.
also reflects commitments to reduce the G EC6 on ‘planning for consumer
length and complexity of planning choice’, a rewriting of the much- In conclusion, I still find some of the
guidance, leaving details to be provided criticised advice in the consultation advice unclear, particularly on ‘consumer
in extra daughter documents. revision; choice’ and support for local or
My initial impression is of a lack of G .7
EC7 , which states that if independent traders. However, it is good
integration between ‘economic’ and development plan policies do not to see a positive response to comments
‘town centres’ policies: these occupy identify sites for retail expansion, then made by consultees to last year’s
separate parts of the document and are they should set out ‘criteria-based consultation revision, as well as a much
to some extent contradictory. It is clear policies’ for assessing planning more concise and direct presentation of
that the ‘town centres first’ policy takes applications; policy. I
precedence over any encouragement of G EC18, which lists the supporting
‘regeneration investment’ in off-centre evidence that should accompany Cliff Guy, Honorary Professor at the School of
locations, but there is some recognition planning applications for off-centre City & Regional Planning, Cardiff University
of the potential role of retail development;
Notes
development in creating new G EC20, a rewriting of the criteria for
1 Consultation Paper on a New Planning Policy
employment. impact assessment, including a Statement 4: Planning for Prosperous
The guidance on ‘town centre uses’, statement on carbon dioxide Economies. DCLG, 2009.
particularly retail planning and emissions and climate change – this is www.communities.gov.uk/publications/
development, has clearly benefited from still very brief, but separate ‘good planningandbuilding/consultationeconomicpps
2 A ‘living draft’ of Planning for Town Centres:
the consultation process on the draft practice guidance’ is promised;2 and
Good Practice Guide on Need, Impact and the
revision of PPS6 which was issued last G EC21, a useful summary of Sequential Approach is available for comment at
year (see Retail Forum issue 16). Much ‘consideration of planning applications’ www.gvagrimley.co.uk/
paper has been saved through the which prioritises the sequential test towncentresgoodpracticeguide.xml
pruning of homilies and waffle: the draft’s
length is about 14½ pages compared
with 23 in PPS6 (ignoring introductory
material and annexes). Questions and uncertainty
The major omission from the original Ruairidh Jackson, The Co-operative Group
PPS6 is, as expected, the requirement to
assess the quantitative need for off- he draft PPS is an encouraging development control tool? There is
centre retail proposals. Otherwise there T start, but many businesses and more recognition of the role played
Retail Forum : The NRPF Newsletter
appear to be no significant changes in individuals will still have a lot to say by incumbent retailers and
policy. There is no mention of any during the consultation period. The independent shops; but will it deliver
‘competition test’ for supermarkets, new style, with more specific policies a more level playing field? The draft
following Tesco’s successful appeal and a clear attempt to provide more policies do provide a clearer
against the Competition Commission’s definition to the issues, is welcomed; framework; but will they create a
proposal. However, there is substantial but while it attempts to provide the more predictable set of outcomes?
rewriting of detailed guidance, mainly answers there will always be Only time will tell, but whatever side
amounting to clarification rather than uncertainty. people may find themselves on, it is
new policy. This includes: There is better advice for plan- essential to get engaged and join the
G Policy EC1 – a useful checklist of makers; but will it lead to more of a debate. I
evidence that should be assembled to plan-led system for retail, rather than Ruairidh Jackson, Head of Planning and
inform development plan policies; the historic use of PPS6 as a Property Strategy, The Co-operative Group
G EC3 on ‘regional planning for town
The new impact test and sustainability
Jonathan Baldock, Consultant
T he plan-making policies of the draft
PPS4 are very similar to the
requirements of PPS6. The main policy
the proposal ‘is likely to lead to
significant adverse impacts in terms of
mitigation of or adaptation to climate
out-of-centre retail complexes by stealth,
rather than through the development
plan process.
change is the new impact test for change...’. The need test is not dead for planning
potential developments. This sets out These will be tough tests for car- applications, because trade diversion is
eight ‘key impacts’ and (if the key dependent out-of-centre retail one of the key impacts to be assessed.
impacts are not significantly adverse) developments to pass. If rigorously This requires forecasting of available
four ‘wider impacts’ which must be applied, they may well preclude single expenditure and its capture by existing
assessed when local planning authorities free-standing superstores and store stores as the first steps in the process –
allocate sites for development and when extensions and reduce out-of-centre in other words, forecasting capacity (or
planning applications are submitted. The development. However, expect need). Before trade diversion can be
most important of the key impacts are developers to seek opportunities to assessed, it is also necessary to know
the impacts on sustainability – i.e. group new out-of-centre stores with how well the existing stores are trading –
mitigation of climate change – and the existing ones and claim linked trips and again, an element of need forecasting. It
impact on accessibility by a choice of mileage reductions as a result. Clearly, is therefore unlikely that there will be any
means of transport, on car mileage and traffic engineers will be much in demand change in the way that quantitative retail
carbon dioxide emissions, and on linked for assessments which demonstrate impact assessments are carried out as a
trips with existing centres. These are the compliance with these tests! If local result of the proposed new policies. I
most important because they are authorities are not robust in judging such
specifically highlighted as a reason why planning applications, the result could be Jonathan Baldock, Town Centres & Retail
planning permission should be refused, if the establishment of increasingly large Planning Consultant
Scope for (mis)interpretation
Stephen Wright, John Lewis Partnership
J ohn Lewis Partnership broadly
welcomes the proposals in the draft
PPS, albeit with a note of caution. The
the planning process, is going to be
crucial. This will require training and
resourcing, as well as a firm and
move towards a more holistic analysis of continued commitment to town centre
the positive and negative impacts of a vitality and viability.
proposal is a welcome development The proposals would do away with the
which should enable better consideration unintended consequences of the need
of the benefits and disadvantages of a test, but the hearings of the CLG Select
development than the outgoing, and Committee Inquiry into PPS6: Town
much narrower, need and impact tests of Centres in May made it clear that some
PPS6. remain to be convinced that scrapping
However, the shift from quantitative the need test is appropriate. We maintain
tests to qualitative evaluations, together that it is, provided that the replacement
with the wording of the draft policies, is sufficiently robust to give equal if not
means that there will be some scope for greater support to town centres.
interpretation (and, potentially, We anticipate the proposed tests will
misinterpretation) of the new tests. The result in substantial work for consultants
text of the policies can be interpreted to to be applied in such a way as to place and lawyers, as lengthy impact
maintain the protection and support short-term economic recovery ahead of assessments are prepared and the
given to town centres, but the statement medium-term and long-term sustainable meaning of terms such as ‘significant
by the then Housing and Planning growth and place-making. adverse impacts’ is argued with planning
Minister, Margaret Beckett, in launching Town centres have a fundamental role officers, at planning inquiries and through
the document points towards a different to play in social cohesion, economic and the Courts. This would be an unwelcome
interpretation. The Minister noted that environmental well-being, and place- development, given the Government’s
the new policies ‘provide the flexibility making. We hope that the new proposals devolutionary aims and the ongoing
needed to tackle the current economic will be clarified to ensure that these key push for a more streamlined planning
uncertainty and exploit the opportunities aims are not undermined. In any event, system. I
available...’. There is scope, within the the way in which the new policies are Stephen Wright, Principal Lawyer (Planning),
wording of the policies, for the new tests interpreted by local authorities, through John Lewis Partnership
July 2009
PPS4 Debate
The importance of the evidence base
Miles Davis, University College London
T he new consultation draft guidance
certainly looks a very different beast
from last year’s PPS4 and PPS6
In reality the current evidence base
varies greatly between local authorities,
and comparisons over time and between
policy. The underlying technology is
capable of much more, and the NRPF
Research Group is investigating
consultation drafts, although supposedly places are usually difficult. Although the alternative ways of using it with Valuation
only the format and emphasis have health check indicators first appeared in Office floorspace data – another cheap
changed. In particular, the importance of the mid-1990s, uptake has been slow. but under-used data source.
the evidence base has been literally Studies1,2 have highlighted the lack of Overall, while the prominence given to
brought to the fore. The first policy, EC1, comprehensive and consistent data and the evidence base in the new draft PPS4
sets out the requirements for a robust the understandable tendency of is a marked and welcome change, the
evidence base for positive planning, resource-stretched local authorities to actual information requirements have not
giving the subject much more use the indicators most easily, quickly or fundamentally altered. But this new
prominence that the previous draft PPS4 cheaply measured, rather than those emphasis does reinforce the need to
and, particularly, PPS6. most relevant. Meanwhile the list of bring the current evidence base up to
This new emphasis on a sound indicators continues to grow. scratch. With the tools already in place,
evidence base is no surprise given the Ironically the DCLG’s own Town Centre the timely provision of basic data by the
new onus on planning authorities to plan Statistics (available at DCLG, such as floorspace totals for each
proactively and allocate sites for retail www.planningstatistics.org.uk) should centre and annual changes, seems a
during the plan-making process, first already provide free annual floorspace, good place to start. I
seen in the PPS6 consultation draft. The employment and rateable value data on a
Miles Davis, Researcher, Centre for Advanced
new, more sophisticated impact test consistent, comprehensive and
Spatial Analysis, UCL
requires consideration of a wide range of comparable basis for town centres
impacts, and it is also suggested that across England and Wales, but Notes
impacts of particular local importance can awareness of these is low and recent 1 J. Cox, M. Thurstain-Goodwin, and C. Tomalin:
Town Centre Vitality & Viability: A Review of
be specified. The concept of hierarchies updates have been sporadic as the
the Health Check Methodology. NRPF 2000 ,
and networks of centres is highlighted, as Department’s own scarce resources 2 Policy Evaluation of the Effectiveness of PPG6.
is the need to assess potential for growth have been focused elsewhere – making CB Hillier Parker and Cardiff University, for the
across them and to manage changes. At it hard to gauge the success of current ODPM, 2004
the decision-making stage, for proposals
requiring an impact assessment planning
authorities are recommended to agree
the level and type of information to be
Social exclusion objectives
submitted beforehand. Bill Boler, Under-served Markets Project
The new draft PPS provides detail on
evidence base preparation, particularly
needs assessment. The accompanying
Good Practice Guide highlights the
W here relevant, the USM (Under-
served Markets) Project has
sought to engage in dialogue over
promote town centres first, we also
welcome the proposed impact test’s
reference to the specific needs of
importance of monitoring the performance public policy in order to promote its deprived areas and the link between
of centres over time and of being able to goals – specifically recognition of the retail and wider regeneration and
make comparisons with other centres. importance of retail-led regeneration social exclusion objectives.
The town centre vitality and viability and the need for investment in Overall, we are especially pleased:
healthcheck indicators within the draft deprived areas as a catalyst for the revised policy document makes
PPS are recommended as a good regeneration. 22(!) references to ‘deprived areas’,
starting point. The USM Project welcomes several reflected in the objectives, planning
The proposed changes are not intended positive changes in the new draft approach and impact test sections.
Retail Forum : The NRPF Newsletter
to impose any net additional costs on the PPS and accompanying Good This compares with just two
private or public sectors, as theoretically Practice Guide – particularly the references a few years ago, in the old
all the impacts to be assessed should continued promotion of town PPG6. In addition, the new impact
have been considered under the existing centres and the plan-led approach, test – following the sequential test –
regime. However, consultation responses as well as the acknowledgement of requires the consideration of ‘wider
for the draft PPS6 revision have revealed social exclusion and deprivation ,
impacts’ and three of the four wider
widespread concerns about the resource issues and the role that the retail impact issues have been key elements
and data costs of collecting suitably sector can play in alleviating them of our project work (deprived areas,
robust evidence and market information. through regeneration projects. While employment, and regeneration). I
It is suggested that some of this recognising that the primary purpose
information will come from the proposed of the draft PPS is to guide planning Bill Boler, Director, Investment & Physical
new Local Economic Assessments, and policy, and in terms of retail policy to Regeneration, Business in the Community
joint working is also encouraged.
Competition, vitality and vibrancy
Simon Birnbaum, Tesco Stores Limited
T he aim of draft PPS4 is ‘to make
planning policies clearer, more
concise, more businesslike and easier to
creation and economic regeneration
should be part of the key impacts as
opposed to being cited as ‘wider
In a weak economic climate
developers need consistency and
efficiency in decision-making – it is
use’. The draft brings together all the impacts’. Such changes would reflect the important to reduce risk levels and
Government’s key planning policies current economic challenges and assist in barriers to investment and regeneration.
relating to the economy. The long meeting the Government’s objective of The draft PPS contains clear principles,
awaited Good Practice Guide on need, achieving sustainable economic growth. but the accompanying Good Practice
impact and the sequential approach has The draft PPS recognises that the Guide is detailed and prescriptive and,
been published as a ‘living draft’ to proposed impact assessment must be while seen as a pragmatic document,
support the implementation of town applied in a proportionate way in would benefit from being streamlined in
centre policies set out in the draft PPS. accordance with the scale of its final form. I
Tesco has always supported the development proposed.
Simon Birnbaum, Strategic Town Planning
principle of town centre first and is Local planning authorities can help
Manager, Tesco Stores Limited
pleased to see this maintained. Tesco create the right conditions for diversity to
also welcomes the fact that reference is flourish. It is important that they do so in Note
made to looking at the mix and diversity a way which encourages competition, 1 Supplement to PPS1 – whereby applicants
should consider how well their development
of uses to ensure vibrant town centres – vitality and vibrancy. The character of a
proposals contribute to the Government’s
the identity of the proposed operator has proposed development and the type and ambition of a low-carbon economy and how
never been a relevant consideration in range of goods to be sold are correct well adapted they are for the expected effects
the UK planning system, and this matters to be taken into account. of climate change
principle is retained in the draft PPS.
The Government’s objectives to
achieve growth in the economy and
productivity and to create prosperous
More work to be done
communities are welcomed. However, Phil Morris, Norfolk County Council
while ‘town centre uses’ are referred to
as ‘economic development’ it is apparent
when comparing draft Policy EC12 with
draft Policy EC20 that a more stringent
T he new draft PPS has been more
clearly formatted as ‘policies’.
However, a cursory reading suggests
The ‘need test’ had the advantage of
being relatively simple and has been
sufficient to assess some applications
impact assessment is to be applied that more work needs to be done to without the need for further retail
towards retail development than to clarify those elements that are genuine impact assessment. An average,
traditional employment uses such as national policy (and so do not need to be numerate local authority planner, taught
industry and warehousing. repeated at the local level) and those some of the tricks of the trade, could
The proposed removal of the need test that are guidance. The PPS is also a bit understand it and have some chance of
for planning applications is welcomed. muddled on what policies are required at judging an application. More
Need is already covered by impact on the different levels of Local Development importantly, all LDFs should be
the vitality and viability and scale tests, Frameworks (LDFs) – a Core Strategy supported by retail studies, so a local
and together with the sequential does not include a Proposals Map, so authority will already have a broad
assessment and accessibility criteria of the PPS is wrong to require a Core understanding of the capacity for new
previous versions of PPG6 /PPS6 they Strategy to define primary frontages. floorspace in each category. Now, lack
are designed to protect town centres. As with the last draft of PPS6, the of capacity cannot be used to filter out
The proposed impact assessment for ‘need’ test has been scrapped for a proportion of applications. Retail
town centre uses not in accordance with applications (it is still required for impact assessments add a significant
the development plan is a step in the forward planning to inform new additional level of complexity. I doubt
right direction of balancing the positive allocations in LDFs). It has never been that there will be many, if any, local
and negative aspects of a proposed entirely clear why this approach has authorities with the expertise to judge
development. been dropped. It is not additional work the kind of assessments that will be
The order of the considerations to be as it is the first stage of a retail impact required. So if a local authority wishes
taken into account under the proposed assessment. Of course, needs testing to properly understand the impact of a
impact assessment should be revised. The still exists for other aspects of planning. retail application, then independent
draft places the effect on carbon dioxide If a local authority can demonstrate an consultants will need to be employed
emissions and climate change first in the adequate supply of housing to cater for to advise on the applicant’s assessment
‘key impacts’ to be assessed. This is a ‘need’, then non-conforming – every time. Do local authorities have
requirement as opposed to an impact.1 applications can legitimately be the budgets for this? I
Impact on the vitality and viability of the refused. Clearly an abundance of shops Phil Morris, Principal Planner, Norfolk County
town centre is seventh on the list of ‘key is more important than houses! Council
impacts’, while matters such as job
July 2009
PPS4 Debate
Evidence base resources
Mike Haines, LGA and Teignbridge District Council
I am sure we all welcome the move
towards more streamlined and
simplified national policy guidance, and
MP I am well aware of the inter-
.
relationship between economies in rural
and urban areas in my own sub-region,
or impose additional burdens’; but should
we not make every effort to minimise
the workload rather than just not
support the principle that the planning and would have wished for more increase it? I remain concerned about
system should positively support emphasis on sub-regional planning in the how resource-intensive putting the
sustainable economic development. document. evidence base together might be. I
As a member of a rural local authority I Annex B provides a very useful
am pleased to see recognition of the comparison, and I note that it seeks to Cllr Mike Haines, Deputy Chair, LGA Environment
importance of the rural economy, demonstrate ‘the proposal will not Board, and Planning Portfolio Holder, Teignbridge
following the review by Matthew Taylor increase the overall costs of assessments District Council
Knowledge Base update
T
he update to the NRPF Knowledge consumers use and perceive town challenge here for those seeking to
Base listing material from 2008 is centres has highlighted critical manage and promote town centres.
now available at www.nrpf.org/ considerations in thinking about what Whatever the realities of the policy
PDF/NRPF_Biblio_2009.pdf. policies and management structures can which will emerge from current
Users should note that throughout the be devised to ensure that town centres processes in the DCLG, there is an
reference listing all academic papers can be more successful. Wider urban opportunity to change the image of the
have e-mail contacts. Users should literatures are seeking to move from role and function of town centres in
contact the authors to obtain papers as thinking in terms of health metaphors for communities and regions to something
authors almost always have pre- town centres to more positive ways of more dynamic in economic and social
publication PDF files which they would thinking about urban places. There is a terms. I
be willing to release. The web links have
been checked and updated for 2009. The
main knowledge base now covers the
last ten years, and can be searched using
Retail planning definitions –
the search function in Adobe Acrobat. It
is available at www.nrpf.org/PDF/
NRPF_Biblio_All.pdf.
the last word?
T
The literature for 2008 includes a range he NRPF’s definitions for retail were unable to recommend a
of academic, policy and practitioner planning have now been definition of net sales area, but put
material, structured into three main included in Appendix A of forward one which could apply to all
sections: competition and planning; Planning for Town Centres: Good shops and stores, including foodstores,
PPS6; and town centres. Practice Guide on Need, Impact and and an alternative which could apply
The commentary on the literature the Sequential Approach, published in to foodstores only. DCLG has asked for
highlights the contribution of research April by GVA Grimley on behalf of the views on these alternatives for
work and the challenges it makes to DCLG as a ‘living draft’ for foodstores as part of consultation on
policy. For example, the literature on consultation.The definitions are those the draft Good Practice Guide.
competition challenges the limited recommended by the NRPF – except So now it’s nearly all over? Well, not
Retail Forum : The NRPF Newsletter
definition of the market used by the .
for that of ‘net sales area’ When we quite. Once the final version of the
Competition Commission. It explores consulted interested parties on the Guide is published by DCLG alongside
different ways in which new market final draft, all the other definitions the new PPS4, the NRPF will probably
entry and format innovation can take were relatively uncontentious; but ‘net need to draw the attention of
place. Similarly, while town centres sales area’ aroused some strongly held interested parties to the final new
remain at the centre of policy, planning views. Broadly speaking, our draft definitions and advise on their
policy seems primarily concerned with definition was supported by the public application. But the acceptance of
directing development to town centres sector, while most of the major food national definitions marks a big step
rather than with considering how this will retailers supported an alternative put towards accuracy and consistency of
deliver successful town centres. Current forward by the Competition analysis for retail planning. I
policy is insufficient to ensure Commission in the recent Groceries Jonathan Baldock
prosperous and successful town Market Investigation. As a result, we Town Centres & Retail Planning Consultant
centres/places. Research on how
A Mixed use and
chieving and encouraging ‘mixed-
use’ development has been driven
by the planning system to counter a
preponderance of single-use schemes that
retail content
came forward in the 1980/90s. Planners and
urban designers have never been happy
with single dominant land uses, albeit the
planning system has been responsible for
prescribing the segregation of uses by
inflexible land use zoning through the ‘Mixed use’ as a concept has lost its original
development plan system. By contrast, purpose, with dangers for the proper planning
developers and investors preferred the
simplicity and certainty of single-use building
of retail development, says Alan Taylor
developments, arguing that a ‘mix’ could frontages in bland residential and office Realities – was quite prophetic about the
be achieved across a wider area rather than blocks. Housing practitioners use the term then clamour to promote ‘mixed-use’
by being prescriptive about achieving the ‘mixed use’ to describe a desire to achieve developments: ‘Schemes which offer few,
‘mix’ within a building or a small land area. not a mix of land uses but a mix of tenures. if any, of the benefits associated with
There has been a desire to overcome the The original purpose of promoting ‘mixed traditional mixed use areas are,
separation of uses that have said to use’ as a means of maximising the nevertheless, described as mixed-use
characterise the modern English city, development potential of town centre sites developments. This debases the concept
whose urban form had begun to replicate has been grasped by other practitioners to and risks reducing support for the idea. The
the dispersal and sprawl of American urban promote their particular interests, often in term is used as a marketing slogan by
development rather than the complexity of locations other than just town centres. The some people and the concept is seen as a
the European ‘compact city’. In his 1995 initial resistance from the development panacea by others. A lack of clarity
press release marking the launch of a draft community to ‘mixed use’ within buildings surrounds much of the debate about
of PPG6, John Gummer indicated central has largely been overcome – although mixed-use developments.’
government’s desire to promote ‘mixed use’ some would say that street level retail uses ‘Mixed use’ is now synonymous with
within town centres, and that message is are provided to meet requests from council ‘sustainable development’ and has become
still embedded in the current PPS6 (in para. planning authorities rather than commercial a label equivalent of the CE label on
2.20). The delivery of ‘mixed use’ schemes need. ‘Mixed use’ has become the norm, European consumer goods: nobody knows
within town centres has become the not the exception. what it really means, but the development
expected norm rather than the exception in ‘Mixed-use’ schemes now cover every would be in some way devalued if the label
the 1980/90s: ‘The Government is spectrum and scale of development from was not applied.
concerned to ensure that efficient use the £1 billion Olympic village or new eco- What has been lost in the universal use
should be made of land within centres and town scale at one extreme, down to a single of the ‘mixed use’ label on any sizeable
elsewhere. Local planning authorities block of flats with a ground-floor coffee shop development is that the original idea was
should formulate planning policies which at the other – and every graduation of size proposed as a clear town centre focused
encourage well-designed, and, where in between. The ‘mix’ constituent parts can concept. The danger is that the ‘mixed use’
appropriate, higher-density, multi-storey range from hypermarkets and sub-regional format has spread beyond town and city
development within and around existing shopping down to a ‘corner shop’ scale centres and has dragged the retailing
centres, including the promotion of mixed- retail unit embedded in a single residential component of the ‘mix’ with it. Retailing in
use development and mixed-use areas.’ tower. Often the constituent parts are not all its guises (A1, A2, A3, A4 or A5) is often
In terms of delivering sustainable obvious, not always separately identified or the only use that will deliver a ‘mix’ beyond
development, of making best use of scarce listed, and the shorthand all-embracing housing, flats or student accommodation.
town and city centre land, of reinforcing ‘mixed-use’ label is used instead. The term The clamour to ensure that there is a ‘mix’
the multiplier effect of grouping together a obscures and glosses over the actual further fuels the pressure to add retailing
complementary mix of town centre uses, constituent parts of the ‘mix’. to sites which are not town or city centre
and of designing active and vibrant uses at locations. New retailing is often provided
street level, delivering ‘mixed-use’ high- The debasement of ‘mixed use’ where there is no commercial requirement
density development within town and city The term ‘mixed use’ has become a for it within inner city communities, where
centres seems to tick all the right boxes. common label, applied to almost every the old forms of retailing are often
Town centres were seen as being the project reported in the development press. struggling to survive and prosper.
appropriate and proper location for true No longer is it possible to understand from Lost in this ambiguity is any clarity of the
‘mixed-use’ schemes, and inevitably retail the label ‘mixed use’ what that real role, need and purpose of one of the
in its various forms was usually a development content and format might be. key constituents of ‘mixed use’: the retail
constituent part of that ‘mix’, along with The component parts and uses are not component. Lost in that ambiguity is the
other commercial uses. clearly described, and the label rarely paints original intention to deliver ‘mixed use’ as a
However, ‘mixed use’ has gained a much an accurate or meaningful description of key constituent of achieving active and
wider currency, proving attractive to a variety the scheme. ‘Mixed use’ as a concept has vibrant town centres. ‘Mixed use’ has
of practitioners with vastly different priorities lost its original purpose, and its use in become a term without any real meaning,
and interest areas. Urban designers have describing virtually any development has and lost in that ‘mix’ is the proper planning
recognised the positive aspect of ‘mixed led to it being used with very little of retail development. I
use’ (bars, restaurants and retail) in precision. That ambiguity has real dangers.
Alan Taylor was formerly Senior Planner in the
providing interest and activity at street level A paper produced by the RICS in 1996 – Planning & Economic Division, City Development
in what otherwise would be lifeless street Mixed Use Development: Concept and Department, Leeds City Council.
July 2009
Retail markets in the spotlight
T
wo events in coming months will while others see DCLG as the natural
turn the spotlight on traditional home, something the Minister concurred
retail markets. Both will give a with. The Committee was keen to identify
welcome airing to a corner of the retail obstacles within both central government
industry sometimes not viewed by and local government to the growth in
retailers, developers, planners and policy- retail markets, and also asked about the
makers as part of the same family as high factors underpinning the success of
street shops, shopping centres, and other markets both in the UK and Europe. The
outlets. Considering their history and the Committee’s report will be eagerly
sheer number of markets that exist in anticipated by an industry keen to shed
some form in practically every town or evidence pointed out (along with that its Cinderella image. The complete set of
city in the UK, this is an odd situation. from others, such as NABMA), part of oral hearings evidence is available on the
First, the CLG Select Committee will the problem with any analysis of the NRPF website (at www.nrpf.org/PDF/
publish the report of its inquiry into the sector is the lack of regular and reliable markets_oral_evidence.pdf).
state of the traditional retail markets data. In fact, there has only ever been The second event is an international
sector in the UK. The Committee has one national survey, undertaken by conference to be held at London’s
recently finished taking evidence to the NABMA itself in 2005, which revealed a Barbican Centre on 26 June. Staged by
inquiry, with sessions having taken place mixed picture across the country. The WUWM, the conference programme
in London, Leicester and elsewhere, survey showed that some markets were includes a keynote paper on the retail
accompanied by visits to a range of street growing – such as farmers’ markets and markets industry in the UK from CLG
and indoor markets. The Committee car boot sales, along with newer Committee advisor Professor Alan
intends to make recommendations on specialist markets such as Borough Hallsworth, as well as sessions that will
the sector’s future direction and needs. Market in London – while others were include Robin Butler, Development
The NRPF gave evidence to the inquiry, showing a small decline in the number of Director from Lend Lease, one of the
along with the President of the World traders and customers. partners with Grosvenor in the Preston
Union of Wholesale Markets (WUWM) The lack of data was something the CLG Markets project. Presentations from
on 20 April, having sent in evidence Committee discussed, along with the need Hamburg, Burgos in Spain and from
beforehand (see the NRPF website at for a ‘champion’ in government for markets France and Holland will look at examples
www.nrpf.org/). The DCLG Minister – about which views differ in the industry. of successful new market initiatives.
responsible – Iain Wright MP – also Some favour a foothold in BERR as the Information on the event can be found at
attended the session. As the NRPF department responsible for enterprise, www.wuwmretailconference2009.org.I
Reinvigorating the high street
L
ondon First has set up a London London Plan. It is also hoped it will help The work currently being undertaken
Retail Commission to examine how London boroughs in developing initiatives by DTZ for DCLG on the planning tools
to retain and strengthen London’s and policy. needed to promote retail diversity and
retail diversity and to explore ways of The process will involve a series of the BRC’s strategy report on the high
supporting the capital’s town centres. steering group meetings, roundtable street will also be fed into the process.
Jeremy Newsum, Chief Executive of discussions, seminars, and other meetings. The NRPF’s report on the role of
Grosvenor Estates, has agreed to chair the A range of issues have been identified, secondary shopping is another important
Commission, which includes a mixture of from lease structures, rating and source. Further information on the work
developers, retailers, investors, property planning policy, to the role of markets of the Commission can be obtained from
owners, agents, and retail organisations. and transport. A number of case studies Kate Vandermeer at London First – see
In part set up to tackle the effects of will be used to highlight good practice www.londonfirst.co.uk/keeping-the-
Retail Forum : The NRPF Newsletter
the recession, the Commission is a both from the UK and abroad, and a uk-competitive/planning--
response to the challenges facing all series of research topics have also been development/london-retail-
retailers, from reduced consumer identified to feed into the discussions. commission/. I
expenditure to other factors such as
growing use of the internet, increased The National Retail Planning Forum. Limited by guarantee. Registered in England
competition from new large-scale and Wales under No. 3071181. Registered Charity No. 1059869.
shopping centres, and problems faced by NRPF Board Members: BCSC, The Co-operative Group, Grosvenor, John Lewis
local shops. It is felt that action is needed Partnership, Lend Lease, Local Government Association, NABMA, Planning Officers
now to ensure the long-term health and Society, Tesco Stores, Westfield
vitality of London’s retail centres. The For further information on the Forum and its activities, please contact
Commission is to meet between June .
George Nicholson, 6 Copperfield Street, London SE1 0EP Tel./Fax: 020-7633 0903.
and September this year, with a view to E-mail: Gnicho6499@aol.com. Website: http://www.nrpf.org. Retail Forum is
making an input into the review of the published with support from the Department for Communities and Local Government.
Issue 18 of Retail Forum will be published in autumn 2009 July 2009